metroidfandomcom-20200222-history
Talk:Fruit
No. No. No no no no. This does not deserve an article. These types of articles, like Santa and Bee, have absolutely no role in the games other than seen or mentioned briefly. I don't know what you're trying to do, but this has less significance than the "white squiggly thingies". It's seen for five seconds, is not interacted with, doesn't even have an official or semi-official name, and is merely shown to introduce little birdie. I say this goes. The ExterminatorTalk 19:36, June 11, 2011 (UTC) Yes it is interacted with. This is the thing you zoom in on, not little birdie. --[[User:RoyboyX|'Р'o'й'б'o'й'X']] (Talk • • UN) 19:37, June 11, 2011 (UTC) :For all we know, it might not even be a fruit. The MarioGalaxy2433g5 {talk/ } 19:39, June 11, 2011 (UTC) Possibly, but we are not making this an Unknown (you two would even agree). Birdie was trying to nip this, so maybe it was a fruit, and then he was later sucking on Kihunter honey. I'd say it is some sort of food, and fruit is the most logical idea. --[[User:RoyboyX|'Р'o'й'б'o'й'X']] (Talk • • UN) 19:43, June 11, 2011 (UTC) This doesn't even merit an "unknown". At most it merit's a mention on little birdie's page. The ExterminatorTalk 19:46, June 11, 2011 (UTC) It doesn't merit a UMS 13? --[[User:RoyboyX|'Р'o'й'б'o'й'X']] (Talk • • UN) 19:48, June 11, 2011 (UTC) :Ex added the Delete template. We should take the conversation to the Entry when Ex finishes adding it. The MarioGalaxy2433g5 {talk/ } 19:49, June 11, 2011 (UTC) @Roy: No. On Little Birdie's page, it should say, "Little Birdie nipped at some fruit and played with it." That's it. No other mention needs to be made except for possible reference. @Mario: Can't copy/paste. Could you do it? The ExterminatorTalk 19:53, June 11, 2011 (UTC) :LOL, I didn't mean it literally. I meant stop talking here, and talk over there. The MarioGalaxy2433g5 {talk/ } 19:58, June 11, 2011 (UTC) ::._............Right, uh, I knew that. I was making sure you were paying attention. The ExterminatorTalk 20:22, June 11, 2011 (UTC) ::I'm such an idiot when it comes to these things. lol Article Relevancy The subject of this Fruit is detailed as important, due to it's involvement with Little Birdy, and is also detailed both to be the creature's favourite food and to indeed be a fruit via developmental artwork: http://www.metroid-database.com/mom/artwork/gallery/english/momart69-little-birdie-cage.png. This object is subject to encyclopedic inclusion via the fact that this is an encyclopedic website >_> . All little in-universe things should be included. Grass even, if we know for a fact it is grass. Learn to 'wiki for a game series' universe. It is going to naturally be massive, so take your head out of your own asses and take a breath of the real world for once (not you MG, this is mainly directed at Ex, and his newly-found arrogant pissy-ness :P ). Most of your personal opinions are irrelevant to what should or should not be included. The fact that this is an online encyclopedia outranks your (as well as my) personal opinion(s). If you don't like it, change the policy through RfC to actual deny inclusion to a broad group of articles such as these. Otherwise, kindly stop bickering, everyone should know that I have a very low tolerance for stupid bullshit, and the pointless bickering is just that. Unless someone wants to start an RfC on the matter, the article and those like it stay. --[[User:Piratehunter|'ا'ل'ق'ر'ا'ص'ن'ة'ه'ن'ت'ر']]{ADMIN} (Talk• •Logs) 19:21, June 18, 2011 (UTC) :For the record I'm planning on making one. I created Forum:Notability to test the waters and for any possible suggestions. I'm not exactly sure where I want to go with it, so I want ALL opinions. Wikitroid is supposed to be a community. The MarioGalaxy2433g5 {talk/ } 20:26, June 18, 2011 (UTC) I don't know if you've forgotten, Piratehunter, but let me remind you why we have deletion discussions. Like Mariogalaxy said, Wikitroid is community based, and that means ALL opinions are relevant on any subject. The deletion discussions are there to gather the community's opinions to determine if an article should be kept. In the case of Fruit, it was decided to be deleted. Even if an article has relevance, the ''community's decision overules the validity of an article for inclusion or non-inclusion on the wiki. The ExterminatorTalk/ 21:09, June 18, 2011 (UTC) :Well, in the case of horrible reasons, it doesn't. But in this case, the reasoning is legitimate. Regardless, I think this should be decided AFTER an RFC is created. The MarioGalaxy2433g5 {talk/ } 21:16, June 18, 2011 (UTC) :Well then you are both apparently complete autistic morons. If you had read my post as precisely as you should have, you would understand what I meant by your opinions being irrelevant. Community opinions are relevant in deciding the fate of things through bureaucratic measures such as RfCs. In cases of small little rumbles such as this, or makeshift voting processes like this, the community's opinion means nothing in light of this. If you want to delete this page then please, MG, make an RfC as you said you were, and have votes as to the egress of what we delete and keep. otherwise all RfD will be rendered "Not Assessable". And in direction to Ex's complete arrogant stupidity, The Community's opinion overrules the procedure and policy in the form of bureaucracy. In other words, so that your pathetically simple mind can understand, Ex, you request deletion of a page via community debate, you then change policy in accordance with community consensus. When you don't do both, you end up with a list of policy exceptions. and pathetic little pages such as Fruit are by far not important enough to start a list of exceptions or be included in one. Exterminator, this issue is no longer in your jurisdiction due it having passed said deletion phase, and ventured into the Policy Ratification process. As of now, your only registrable opinion is that in the RfC voting process. MarioGalaxy and I, and FL if he ever comes on, are to debate it, as it has a bigger effect than you can understand. When you don't adjust policy to things such as this you may as well just have individual policies for individual pages, which is asinine and sloppy. --[[User:Piratehunter|ا'ل'ق'ر'ا'ص'ن'ة'ه'ن'ت'ر']]{ADMIN} (Talk• •Logs) 22:33, June 18, 2011 (UTC) ::For the record, I checked the deletion policy and the RfD page prior to the deletion and nothing is stated about notablility at all. This is a gray area. I read the relevant policies five times over. Unless you are refering to C&C which I was told pertained to Cameo and crossover articles ALONE. The policy is open to interpretation on this one. ::What I meant specifically before you called me an autistic moron (excuse me) is that I want EVERYONE's opinion before I form an RfC. Sakai and I doesn't = everyone. I was stating that I disagreed with the undeletion, but regardless an RfC should be formed before further action is taken. The MarioGalaxy2433g5 {talk/ } 00:09, June 19, 2011 (UTC) :::Yes, you aren't listening in the slightest. I've made my point. -- [[User:Piratehunter|'ا'ل'ق'ر'ا'ص'ن'ة'ه'ن'ت'ر']]{ADMIN} (Talk• •Logs) 00:23, June 19, 2011 (UTC) ::::I'm sorry, but YOU ignored policy by going ahead and restoring the article rather than putting it up for deletion review. I specifically asked Roy to use create a deletion review for it, but completely ignored me. And I have yet to see any sort of policy that gives you the right to ignore the clear results of an RfD. The MarioGalaxy2433g5 {talk/ } 00:47, June 19, 2011 (UTC) :::::Lmao -- [[User:Piratehunter|'ا'ل'ق'ر'ا'ص'ن'ة'ه'ن'ت'ر']]{ADMIN} (Talk• •Logs) 01:29, June 19, 2011 (UTC) :(UNDENT)'' Please respond to my point maturely. When an article's deletion is disagreed with, it must be discussed with either the deleting admin or discussed through a deletion review. The MarioGalaxy2433g5 {talk/ } 01:44, June 19, 2011 (UTC) ::I am being quite mature. You are merely being stupid. I'm finished "discussing" with someone as mal-educated as you apparently are. Do as you will, this place has already been rolling down-hill for several months now. Your ignorant stupidity in administrating isn't going to make it any worse. 9_9 [[User:Piratehunter|'''ا'ل'ق'ر'ا'ص'ن'ة'ه'ن'ت'ر']]{ADMIN} (Talk• •Logs) 01:49, June 19, 2011 (UTC) :::How can "lmao" possibly be mature? I '''am' your equal. You need to treat me as your equal. You had no right to restore the article without talking to me. That is being a tyrant. The MarioGalaxy2433g5 {talk/ } 02:27, June 19, 2011 (UTC) ::::Neither of you are being very mature, but that aside...if the community decision was to delete the article, it should be deleted. Period end of story. If a user wishes to bring back an article, than the matter should be rediscussed, and no actions be made on the issue until the community comes to a consensus. Doctor 02:44, June 19, 2011 (UTC) :::::For the most part I was being mature. And that was what I had already stated. >_> The MarioGalaxy2433g5 {talk/ } 02:51, June 19, 2011 (UTC) ::::::"You are my equal" does not qualify as mature in my book, but that isn't the issue. I was trying to summarize what you and Ex said in my post, as you weren't very clear IMO. Anyway, I believe this discussion should be taken to your said forum so the community can decide what is notable. Doctor :(UNDENT) The tyrant comment was borderline, but I said he is my equal because it is true. He overruled the judgement of me and several other members of the community. And I want people to be discussing on the forum, but it looks like people are just going to have to be surprised when the RfC doesn't contain what they want because they didn't participate in the discussion. The MarioGalaxy2433g5 {talk/ } 03:02, June 19, 2011 (UTC) Sticky For whatever reason, the RfD debate is considered closed with the conclusion of "delete"... but the page is still here. "My name is [[User:AdmiralSakai|'AdmiralSakai']], and I approve this message." 21:08, November 11, 2011 (UTC) :Look at the above. However, now that we actually know a little more about the fruit due to the notes on the piece of concept art, I'd say it actually deserves an article now. The MarioGalaxy2433g5 {talk/ } 21:12, November 11, 2011 (UTC) ::Yes. I'd rather not restate my stance on the article. --[[User:RoyboyX|'रॉ'यल'ड़'काए'क्स']] (Talk • • UN) 23:25, November 11, 2011 (UTC) :::So, shall we consider this finished? --[[User:RoyboyX|'रॉ'यल'ड़'काए'क्स']] (Talk • • UN) 14:42, November 12, 2011 (UTC) :::Sorry, I've been somewaht busy with school over the last few days. I still think this article is not needed, but it is nowhere near as clearly irrelevant as it was before, in fact very close to the borderline. Recognizing that fact, and the consensus among other users that it should stay, I'll move it to the "preserved" column pending RfC. Ironic, that the article that prompted me to make a list in the first place is the first one to be excused... "My name is [[User:AdmiralSakai|'AdmiralSakai']], and I approve this message." 00:54, November 15, 2011 (UTC)